Hello, thanks for the responses.
I just wrote 3 of them and all 3 got a 6. Since this is the first time I had a go at them I have no idea if they would deserve a 6 or if that wouldn't be the case at all. I'll paste all 3 of them here.
If somebody, with some kind of experience in AWA scoring, could go through one or more of them it would certainly be appreciated!
The following appeared in the opinion column of a financial magazine:
"On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and
services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will
increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly
during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those
products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument states the middle-aged consumer is a more interesting and valuable customer for department stores and that, since the number of middle-aged people will increase dramatically within the next decade, they can expect retail sales to increase significantly. Furthermore the author advises department stores to start replacing some of those products intented to attract the younger consumer with some of the products intented to attract the middle-aged consumer. Although multiple different reasons are given for the previously mentioned advice, the assumptions and premises used in this argument are unsubstantiated and show more than a few shortcommings.
Firstly, the autor brings up a few numbers with which he wants to show that the middle-aged consumer is and will be a more valuable customer than the younger consumer is right now. He tries to do this by telling us the percentage of their retail expenditure both groups spend on department store products. This seemes dubious since we are given no further information about both groups and we are thus unable to form a clear idea about them.
Secondly, the author states that the number of middle-aged people will increase dramatacally in tha next decade. But again we are given no furter background information about this supposed trend. Furthermore the author links this rise in number to a rise in retail prices. Although this assumption might seem logically sound at first, closer inspection certaily brings up some doubts. The younger group of people, who in a decade will represent the middle-aged consumer, might in the future, for some reason, show even less interest in department stores than they do now.
Thirdly the author advices department stores to replace some of their products and focus more on attracting middle-aged consumers. This advice is very unreliable at best. It might bring in some more middle-aged consumers, but the slight rise in numbers of one group might mean a sharp fall in numbers of the other. The younger crowd could get even more alienated from department stores, which would mean that the middle-aged group, in a decade from now, might have lost all interest in department stores.
In sum it has to be said that, although the argument is not necesaraly wrong, it remains inconclusive in its findings. The data and premises used in the argument are unsubstantiated and the assumptions which lead the author to his conlusion are not logically sound. The author might make his argument more convincing if he could provide us with more detailed information from a trustworthy source or if he would further explain on which his assumptions are based.
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
In this argument the author states that the warranty of certain products needs to be limited to two years. He claims that this needs to be done in order to cut costs for the customer service provided after a sale has been made. The author states they spend to much on the service since a lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle, and that if limited, costs for customer service and premiums paid to service employees should significantly drop. Although this argument is not necessarily incorrect, the reasoning behind it is not sufficiently substantiated and is based on unproven premises and dubious assumptions.
Firstly, the author does not use figures nor does he cite a source to back up his claim about the company spending to much. He does not give any further information about what would be considered 'spending to much'. Furthermore he states that a lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle but no further information or figures are given about this, which makes this statement unreliable at best.
Secondly, the author states that limiting the warranty to two years would limit costs for the company. He does not take into account however that a lifetime warranty might be a very important factor in the decision process of the consumer, and that limiting the warranty might thus severely decrease sales. This would in turn lead to losses which might be bigger than the savings because of the reduced costs.
Thirdly, the author claims that the premium of the employees should go down if lifetime warranty is no longer available. He states that this would be the case since the employees would no longer have to possess the expert skills across the entirety of their very diverse product line. Although it is true that limiting the warranty might require less expert skills of the employees, there is no indication that this can or should be linked to the premiums they are paid. As such, this might not decrease costs at all.
In sum it has to be said, that while this argument is not certainly incorrect and might even show some merit, in its current form it is inconclusive and unreliable at best. The premises are unsubstantiated and in turn make the assumptions very dubious. Although this argument in its current form is not very logically sound and does show multiple short commings, it has to be said that certain adjustments could improve it and make it more conclusive. The most important thing the author would have to do for this is provide more background information, cite sources and provide more evidence for his statements.
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
"In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased and
the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business that has opened. Under
Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate decreased and the population
increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of office and
reelected Varro."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The author argues in this argument that Varro should be reelected mayor. He states that in the city of San Perdito, under the current mayor, Montoya, the population has decreased and the unemployment rate has increased. Furthermore more businesses seem to have closed than have opened. He compares these facts with the period during which Varro was mayor and concludes from this comparation that Varro is clearly the better mayor. This argument is not certainly incorrect and might prove to be true but without sufficient additional information the argument is unreliable at best. The argument's premises are unsubstantiated and the assumptions the author makes are dubious. As of such the argument shows multiple short comings.
First of all, the information we are given about unemployment and population growth are very indecisive. We need more background information to assess if for example the unemployment rate increase could have anything to do with Montoya being a mayor. The unemployment rate might for example have rissen steeply nationwide while it only rose very little in San Perdito. The population decrease might be explained similarly. As of such it could be possible that Montoya has actually done very well in limiting the damage done and deserves reelection.
Secondly, the author's statement that Varro should be reelected is not logically sound. There is no proof that Varro would do better. Even if he might have done better than Montoya in the past, there is no evidence that he would do as good again in another term. There might even be a third candidate who possibly could do better than both Varro and Montoya. But as mentioned before, the fact that either Varro or Montoya has done badly, or that one has done better than the other is unsubstantiated.
In sum it has to be said that, while the argument may have some merit and is not necessarily incorrect, it is certainly flawed in its actual form. The assumptions are not logically sound since they are based on unsubstantiated premises. The author could make his argument more convincing if he went further into detail and based his data on a reliable source. An in detail focus on the economical climate under which both Varro and Montoya were mayor would shed more light on their merit as a mayor and might provide the author with a better argument to convince readers of his point of view.
